1: %% This document created by Scientific Word (R) Version 2.5
2: %% Starting shell: mathart1
3:
4:
5: \documentclass[12pt,thmsa]{article}
6: \usepackage{amssymb}
7:
8: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
9: \usepackage{sw20aip}
10:
11: %TCIDATA{TCIstyle=article/art2.lat,aip,article}
12:
13: %TCIDATA{Created=Thu Aug 10 17:41:59 2000}
14: %TCIDATA{LastRevised=Thu Sep 07 20:51:54 2000}
15: %TCIDATA{Language=American English}
16:
17: \input{tcilatex}
18: \begin{document}
19:
20: \author{S.B. Rutkevich\thanks{%
21: Institute of Solid State and Semiconductor Physics, P. Brovka str., 17,
22: Minsk 220072, Belarus, e-mail: rut@ifttp.bas-net.by}}
23: \title{Analytic Verification of the Droplet Picture in the Two-Dimensional Ising
24: Model}
25: \date{}
26: \maketitle
27:
28: \begin{abstract}
29: It is widely accepted that the free energy $F(H)$ of the two-dimensional
30: Ising model in the ferromagnetic phase $T$$<$$\,T_{c}$ has an essential
31: branch cut singularity at the origin $H=0$. The phenomenological droplet
32: theory predicts that near the cut drawn along the negative real axis $H$$<$$0
33: $, the imaginary part of the free energy per lattice site has the form $%
34: \mathrm{Im}F[\,\exp (\pm i\pi )\mid H\mid \,]=\pm B|H|\exp (-A/\mid H\mid )$
35: for small $\mid H\mid $ . We verify this prediction in analytical
36: perturbative transfer matrix calculations for the square lattice Ising model
37: for all temperatures $0$$<$$T$$<$$T_{c}$ and arbitrary anisotropy ratio $%
38: J_{1}/J_{2}$. We obtain an expression for the constant $A$ which coincides
39: exactly with the prediction of the droplet theory. For the amplitude $B$ we
40: obtain $B=\pi M/18$, where $M$ is the equilibrium spontaneous magnetization.
41: In addition we find discrete-lattice corrections to the above mentioned
42: phenomenological formula for $\mathrm{Im}F$, which oscillate in $H^{-1}$.%
43: \newline
44: \newline
45: \textbf{KEY WORDS: }Ising model, droplet singularity, metastable state,
46: false vacuum decay\medskip \newline
47: \newline
48: \end{abstract}
49:
50: \section{Introduction}
51:
52: It is well known$^{(\citenum{Is}-\citenum{AU})}$, that in the ferromagnetic
53: phase $0<T$$<$$\,T_{c}$ the free energy of the two-dimensional Ising model
54: as the function of the magnetic field $H$ has a so-called droplet
55: singularity at the origin $H=0$. This singularity prevents analytical
56: continuation of the free energy from positive to negative values of $H$
57: along the real $H$-axis. The phenomenological droplet (nucleation) theory$^{(%
58: \citenum{A}-\citenum{Ka})}$ claims, however, that the free energy can be
59: continued from positive to negative magnetic fields along a circle going
60: around the origin in the complex $H$-plane (see Fig. 1). According to this
61: theory, the free energy per lattice site $F(H)$ continued in such a way
62: gains on the negative real axis $H<0$ a nonzero imaginary part, which is
63: expected to have the form
64: \begin{equation}
65: \mathrm{Im}F[\,\exp (\pm i\pi )\mid H\mid \,]=\pm B\,|H|\exp (-A/\mid H\mid )
66: \label{FF}
67: \end{equation}
68: for small $\mid H\mid $ . The sign of this imaginary part depends on the
69: side, from which one approaches to the negative real axis $H<0$. Expression (%
70: \ref{FF}) extrapolates to the ferromagnetic Ising model the results obtained
71: in the semiclassical nucleation field theory analysis of the coarse-grained
72: Ginzburg-Landau model.$^{(\citenum{Langer}-\citenum{CC})}$ In the nucleation
73: theory, the free energy continued to the cut $H<0$ is interpreted as the
74: free energy of the metastable state:
75: \[
76: F_{ms}(H)\equiv F(e^{i\pi }\mid H\mid ).
77: \]
78: Langer conjectured,$^{(\citenum{Langer})}$ that $\mathrm{Im}F_{ms}(H)$ may
79: be identified (up to a dynamical factor) with the metastable phase decay
80: rate provided by the thermally activated nucleation of the critical droplet.
81:
82: The phenomenological droplet theory prediction for the amplitude $A$ in (\ref
83: {FF}) is$^{(\citenum{RG})}$
84: \begin{equation}
85: A=\frac{\beta \hat{\Sigma}^{2}}{8M}, \label{fd}
86: \end{equation}
87: where $M$ is the spontaneous magnetization, and $\hat{\Sigma}^{2}\ $denotes
88: the square of surface free energy of the equilibrium-shaped droplet divided
89: by its area. Both $\hat{\Sigma}^{2}$ and $M$ relate to the equilibrium
90: zero-field state, and are known exactly. The linear depending on $\left|
91: H\right| $ prefactor in (\ref{FF}) arises in the continuum droplet field
92: theory$^{(\citenum{Langer}-\citenum{ZW})}$ from the contribution of the
93: surface excitations of the critical droplet. Voloshin claimed$^{(%
94: \citenum{Voloshin2})}$ that, if fluctuations are continuum and isotropic,
95: the prefactor in (\ref{FF}) becomes universal. Extrapolation of the
96: Voloshin's continuum droplet field theory result to the $d=2$ Ising model
97: leads to the following prediction for the amplitude $B:$%
98: \begin{equation}
99: B\mapsto B_{V}=\frac{M}{2\pi }. \label{Vol}
100: \end{equation}
101:
102: In the continuum field theory, the imaginary part of the free energy appears
103: in the functional integral calculations. In the alternative approach to the
104: droplet singularity problem, one deals with eigenvalues of the Ising model
105: transfer-matrix. Numerical transfer-matrix calculations initiated by Privman
106: and Schulman$^{(\citenum{Pr})}$ and continued by G\"{u}nther, Rikvold and
107: Novotny$^{(\citenum{GRN1},\citenum{GRN})}$ confirm equations (\ref{FF}) and (%
108: \ref{fd}). These equations were confirmed also by Lowe and Wallace,$^{(%
109: \citenum{LW})}$ and by Harris$^{(\citenum{Ha})}$ in numerical analysis of
110: the small-$H$ power expansion for the magnetization $M(H).$ Recently
111: analytic transfer-matrix derivation of equations (\ref{FF}), (\ref{fd}) for
112: the $d=2$ Ising model has been done$^{(\citenum{R})}$ in the extreme
113: anisotropic limit.
114:
115: In this paper we generalize the transfer matrix approach developed in paper$%
116: ^{(\citenum{R})}$ and verify analytically the droplet theory predictions (%
117: \ref{FF}), (\ref{fd}) for the square lattice Ising model for all
118: temperatures $0$$<$$T$$<$$T_{c}$ and arbitrary anisotropy ratio $J_{1}/J_{2}$%
119: . We obtain an expression for the constant $A$ which coincides exactly with
120: the prediction of the droplet theory. For the amplitude $B$ we find $B=\pi
121: M/18$, which is very close to Voloshin's result (\ref{Vol}): $B/B_{V}=\pi
122: ^{2}/9\approx 1.0966$. We suppose, that this small discrepancy results from
123: approximations used in our calculations. Obtained values for the amplitude $%
124: B $ are compared with those extracted numerically from the known
125: coefficients of the expansion of the magnetization in powers of $H$ by means
126: of dispersion relations.$^{(\citenum{LW,1})}$
127:
128: We find also the discrete-lattice corrections to the phenomenological
129: formula (\ref{FF}), which oscillate in $H^{-1}$. The period of oscillations
130: agrees well with that observed by G\"{u}nther \textit{et al.}$^{(%
131: \citenum{GRN})}$ in numerical constrained transfer matrix calculations.
132:
133: \section{Transfer matrix and Hamiltonian\label{tr}}
134:
135: The nearest neighbor Ising model on the square lattice in the magnetic field
136: $H$ is defined by the energy
137: \begin{equation}
138: \mathcal{E}=-\sum_{n=1}^{\mathcal{N}}\sum_{m=1}^{\mathcal{M}}\left(
139: J_{1}\sigma _{m,n}\sigma _{m+1,n}+J_{2}\sigma _{m,n}\sigma _{m,n+1}+H\sigma
140: _{m,n}\right) \label{En}
141: \end{equation}
142: where $\sigma _{m,n}=\pm 1,$ the first/second index of $\sigma _{m,n}$
143: specifies the row/column of the lattice, $\mathcal{M}$ and $\mathcal{N}$
144: denote the number of rows and columns in the lattice, respectively. Periodic
145: boundary conditions are implied.
146:
147: The row to row transfer matrix may be defined as $\hat{T}=e^{U}\hat{T}_{2}\
148: \hat{T}_{1},$ where
149: \begin{eqnarray}
150: \hat{T}_{1} &=&\left[ 2\sinh (2K\,_{1})\right] ^{\mathcal{N}/2}\exp \left(
151: K\,_{1}^{*}\sum_{n=1}^{\mathcal{N}}\sigma _{n}^{1}\right) ,\quad \hat{T}%
152: _{2}=\exp \left( K\,_{2}\sum_{n=1}^{\mathcal{N}}\sigma _{n}^{3}\sigma
153: _{n+1}^{3}\right) ,\quad \nonumber \\
154: U &=&h\sum_{n=1}^{\mathcal{N}}\,\sigma _{n}^{3}. \label{U}
155: \end{eqnarray}
156: Here we have used the standard notations
157: \[
158: K_{1}=\beta J_{1},\quad K_{2}=\beta J_{2},\quad h=\beta H,\quad
159: 2K\,_{1}^{*}=-\ln \left( \tanh K_{1}\right) ,
160: \]
161: $\beta $ is the inverse temperature, $\sigma _{n}^{\alpha }\ (\alpha =1,2,3)$
162: are the Pauli matrices relating to the cite $n$ in the row.
163:
164: The transfer matrix may be chosen in the symmetric form
165: \[
166: \hat{T}_{S}=\left[ \hat{T}_{S}^{(0)}\right] ^{1/2}e^{U}\ \left[ \hat{T}%
167: _{S}^{(0)}\right] ^{1/2},
168: \]
169: where $\hat{T}_{S}^{(0)}$ is the symmetric transfer matrix of the Ising
170: model in zero magnetic field:
171: \[
172: \hat{T}_{S}^{(0)}=\hat{T}_{2}^{1/2}\hat{T}_{1}\hat{T}_{2}^{1/2}.
173: \]
174: As it was shown by Schultz, Mattis and Lieb,$^{(\citenum{SML})}$ the latter
175: becomes diagonal in fermionic variables:
176: \begin{eqnarray}
177: \hat{T}_{S}^{(0)} &=&C\exp \left( -\mathcal{H}^{(0)}\right) ,\qquad
178: \nonumber \\
179: \mathcal{H}^{(0)} &=&\int_{-\pi }^{\pi }\frac{\text{d}\theta }{2\pi }\
180: \omega (\theta )\ \psi ^{\dagger }(\theta )\ \psi (\theta ), \label{H0}
181: \end{eqnarray}
182: where $\mathcal{H}^{(0)}$ is the zero-field Hamiltonian, $\theta $ is the
183: quasimomentum, $C$ is an insufficient numerical factor. Fermionic operators $%
184: \psi ^{\dagger }(\theta )$, $\ \psi (\theta )$ satisfying the canonical
185: anticommutational relations
186: \[
187: \left\{ \psi (\theta )\ ,\psi (\theta ^{\prime })\right\} =\left\{ \psi
188: ^{\dagger }(\theta )\ ,\psi ^{\dagger }(\theta ^{\prime })\right\} =0,\qquad
189: \left\{ \psi ^{\dagger }(\theta )\ ,\psi (\theta ^{\prime })\right\} =2\pi
190: \delta (\theta -\theta ^{\prime })
191: \]
192: can be expressed in terms of the initial Pauli matrices by use of the
193: Jordan-Wigner and duality transformation (see Appendix \ref{apa}). The
194: fermionic spectrum $\omega (\theta )$ is given by
195: \begin{eqnarray}
196: \exp \omega (\theta ) &=&\cosh 2K\,_{1}^{*}\cosh 2K\,_{2}-\cos \theta \sinh
197: 2K\,_{1}^{*}\sinh 2K\,_{2}+ \label{eps} \\
198: &&\left[ \left( \cosh 2K\,_{1}^{*}\cosh 2K\,_{2}-\cos \theta \sinh
199: 2K\,_{1}^{*}\sinh 2K\,_{2}\right) ^{2}-1\right] ^{1/2}. \nonumber
200: \end{eqnarray}
201: Operator $U$ defined by (\ref{U}) also can be represented in the
202: thermodynamic limit $\mathcal{N\rightarrow \infty }$ in the fermionic
203: variables:
204: \begin{equation}
205: U=hM\sum_{n\in \Bbb{Z}}:\exp \frac{\rho _{n}}{2}:, \label{v}
206: \end{equation}
207: where
208: \begin{eqnarray}
209: \frac{\rho _{n}}{2} &=&-\sum_{j<\,n}\psi _{j}^{(+)}\ \psi _{j}^{(-)},
210: \label{111} \\
211: \psi _{j}^{(+)} &=&i\int_{-\pi }^{\pi }\frac{d\theta }{2\pi }\ \frac{\exp
212: (ij\theta )}{\epsilon (\theta )}\left[ \psi (\theta )+\psi ^{\dagger
213: }(-\theta )\right] , \label{112} \\
214: \psi _{j}^{(-)} &=&i\int_{-\pi }^{\pi }\frac{d\theta }{2\pi }\ \exp
215: (ij\theta )\ \epsilon (\theta )\left[ -\psi (\theta )+\psi ^{\dagger
216: }(-\theta )\right] , \label{113} \\
217: \epsilon (\theta ) &=&\left( \frac{z_{1}+z_{1}^{-1}-2\cos \theta }{%
218: z_{2}+z_{2}^{-1}-2\cos \theta }\right) ^{1/4}, \nonumber \\
219: z_{1} &=&\tanh K\,_{1}^{*}/\tanh K\,_{2},\quad z_{2}=\tanh K\,_{1}^{*}\
220: \tanh K\,_{2}, \label{zz}
221: \end{eqnarray}
222: and $M$ is the zero-field magnetization. In the ferromagnetic phase $%
223: M=\left[ 1-k^{2}\right] ^{1/8},$ and $k<1,$ where $k=\left( \sinh
224: 2K\,_{1}\sinh 2K\,_{2}\right) ^{-1}$ $.$ We have used in (\ref{v}) the
225: conventional notation $:...:$ for the normal ordering with respect to the
226: fermionic operators $\psi (\theta ),\ \psi ^{\dagger }(\theta )$. Derivation
227: of equations (\ref{v})-(\ref{113}) is described in Appendix \ref{apa}, in
228: the main points of which we follow Jimbo \textit{et al.}$^{(\citenum{JM})}$%
229: \textit{\ }
230:
231: At zero magnetic field, the Hamiltonian $\mathcal{H}^{(0)}$ of the Ising
232: model is given by (\ref{H0}). Two ferromagnetic ground states $\mid
233: 0_{+}\rangle $ and $\mid 0_{-}\rangle $ coexist in the ferromagnetic phase $%
234: k<1$. They are distinguished by the sign of the spontaneous magnetization $%
235: \langle 0_{\pm }\mid \sigma _{n}^{z}$ $\mid 0_{\pm }\rangle =\pm $ $M$. The
236: state $\mid 0_{+}\rangle $ characterized by the positive magnetization $+M$
237: is the ferromagnetic vacuum of $\psi (\theta )$-operators: $\psi (\theta
238: )\mid 0_{+}\rangle =0$ for all $\theta $.
239:
240: A small magnetic field $h\neq 0$ changes the Hamiltonian $\mathcal{H}^{(0)}$
241: to
242: \begin{equation}
243: \mathcal{H}(h)=-\ln \left( e^{-\mathcal{H}^{(0)}/2}e^{U}\ e^{-\mathcal{H}%
244: ^{(0)}/2}\right) ,\quad \mathcal{H}(0)=\mathcal{H}^{(0)}. \label{hami}
245: \end{equation}
246: It can be expanded in powers$\footnote{%
247: In the extreme anisotropic limit$^{(\citenum{R})}$ the Hamiltonian expansion
248: (\ref{h1}) containes only two terms: $\mathcal{H}(h)=$ $\mathcal{H}^{(0)}+%
249: \mathcal{H}^{(1)},$ where $\mathcal{H}^{(1)}=-U$.}$ of $h$:
250: \begin{equation}
251: \mathcal{H}(h)=\sum_{j=0}^{\infty }\mathcal{H}^{(j)}, \label{h1}
252: \end{equation}
253: where $\mathcal{H}^{(j)}\sim h^{j}$.
254:
255: \section{Modified perturbation theory}
256:
257: Let us consider the eigenvalue problem
258: \begin{equation}
259: \mathcal{H}(h)\ \mid \phi _{+}(h)\rangle =E(h)\mid \phi _{+}(h)\rangle ,
260: \label{eig}
261: \end{equation}
262: where $\mid \phi _{+}(0)\rangle =\mid 0_{+}\rangle $.
263:
264: If $h>0$, the eigenvector $\mid \phi _{+}(h)\rangle $ is the ground state of
265: the Hamiltonian (\ref{hami}), and the corresponding energy $E(h)$ is
266: directly related with the Ising model free energy per lattice cite $%
267: F(h,\beta )$:
268: \begin{equation}
269: F(h,\beta )=F(0,\beta )+\frac{E(h)}{\beta \mathcal{N}}. \label{fr}
270: \end{equation}
271: The energy can be expanded in the formal power series
272: \[
273: \quad E(h)=\sum_{j=1}^{\infty }h^{j}C_{j},
274: \]
275: which coefficients $C_{j}$ can be, in principal, determined from standard
276: Rayleigh-Schr\"{o}dinger perturbation theory.
277:
278: However, if the magnetic field is small and negative $h<0$, the state $\mid
279: \phi _{+}(h)\rangle $ (with positive magnetization almost equal to $M$) must
280: be identified with the metastable (false) vacuum. It decays due to the
281: quantum tunneling, and the decay rate\footnote{%
282: Strictly speaking, the term ''decay rate'' here relates to the
283: quantum-mechanical model with Hamiltonian (\ref{h1}), but not to the initial
284: two-dimensional Ising model (\ref{En}). The nucleation rate in the latter
285: model contains also the so-called kinetic prefactor, which depends on the
286: detailed non-equilibrium dynamics.$^{(\citenum{RG})}$} $\Gamma $ is
287: proportional to the imaginary part of the energy $E(h)$ continued to
288: negative magnetic fields:$^{(\citenum{LL,RS})}$
289:
290: \begin{equation}
291: \Gamma =-2\text{ Im }E(h). \label{img}
292: \end{equation}
293: It turns out, however, that $\Gamma $ can not be determined from the
294: straightforward perturbation theory with the zero-order Hamiltonian $%
295: \mathcal{H}^{(0)}$. This is due to the fact that the term $\mathcal{H}^{(1)}$
296: in the expansion (\ref{h1}) contains the long-range interaction $(-U_{0})$
297: between fermions, which is given by
298: \begin{equation}
299: -U_{0}\equiv -U\mid _{\epsilon (\theta )\rightarrow 1}=\mid h\mid
300: M\sum_{n\in \Bbb{Z}}:\exp \left( -2\sum_{j<\ n}b_{j}^{\dagger }b_{j}\right)
301: :\ . \label{v0}
302: \end{equation}
303: Here
304: \[
305: b_{j}^{\dagger }=\int_{-\pi }^{\pi }\frac{d\theta }{2\pi }\psi ^{\dagger
306: }(\theta )\exp \left( -ij\theta \right) ,\qquad b_{j}=\int_{-\pi }^{\pi }%
307: \frac{d\theta }{2\pi }\psi (\theta )\exp \left( ij\theta \right) ,
308: \]
309: are the operators which create/annihilate a fermion at the cite $j$.
310: Interaction (\ref{v0}) increases linearly with the distance between fermions,%
311: $^{(\citenum{R})}$ and therefore changes the structure of the Hamiltonian
312: spectrum. So, to describe decay of metastable vacuum $\ \mid \phi
313: _{+}(h)\rangle $, one should include the long-range interaction (\ref{v0})
314: into the zero-order Hamiltonian.
315:
316: Accordingly, we subdivide the Hamiltonian (\ref{h1}) into the zero-order $%
317: \mathcal{H}_{0}$ and interaction $V$ parts, as follows:
318: \begin{equation}
319: \mathcal{H}(h)=\mathcal{H}_{0}+V, \label{h2}
320: \end{equation}
321: where
322: \begin{eqnarray}
323: \mathcal{H}_{0} &\equiv &\mathcal{H}^{(0)}-U_{0}-\mathcal{N\,}\left|
324: h\right| \,M, \label{0h} \\
325: \qquad V &\equiv &\mathcal{H}^{(1)}+U_{0}+\mathcal{N\,}\left| h\right|
326: \,M+\sum_{j=2}^{\infty }\mathcal{H}^{(j)} \label{vt}
327: \end{eqnarray}
328: The numerical constant $\mathcal{N\,}\left| h\right| \,M$ in (\ref{0h}) is
329: chosen to provide $\mathcal{H}_{0}\mid 0_{+}\rangle =0$.
330:
331: \subsection{Zero order spectrum}
332:
333: Consider the zero-order eigenvalue problem
334: \begin{equation}
335: \mathcal{H}_{0}\mid \phi _{l}\rangle =E_{l}\ \mid \phi _{l}\rangle
336: \label{zero}
337: \end{equation}
338: First note, that eigenstates $\mid \phi _{l}\rangle $ can be classified by
339: the fermion number, since the modified zero-order Hamiltonian (\ref{0h}){\ }%
340: conserves the number of fermions. As in paper,$^{(\citenum{R})}$ we shall
341: consider only two-fermions (i.e. one-domain) states in (\ref{zero}).
342: Physically, this means that we neglect interaction between nucleating
343: droplets of the stable phase.
344:
345: In the coordinate representation equation (\ref{zero}) takes the form
346: \[
347: \sum_{n^{\prime }\in \Bbb{Z}}K_{nn^{\prime }}\ \phi _{l}(n^{\prime })-M\mid
348: n\ h\mid \phi _{l}(n)=\frac{E_{l}}{2}\phi _{l}(n),
349: \]
350: where
351: \begin{eqnarray*}
352: K_{nn^{\prime }} &=&\int_{-\pi }^{\pi }\frac{d\theta }{2\pi }\ \omega
353: (\theta )\exp [i(n-n^{\prime })\theta ], \\
354: \phi _{l}(n) &=&\langle 0_{+}\mid b_{0}\ b_{n}\mid \phi _{l}\rangle ,\qquad
355: \phi _{l}(-n)=-\phi _{l}(n).
356: \end{eqnarray*}
357: If the energy $E_{l}$ is small enough $E_{l}\ll \omega (0)$, the
358: wavefunction $\phi _{l}(n)$ is mainly concentrated far from the origin in
359: the classically available region $\mid n\mid >\omega (0)/(\mid h\mid M)$.
360: Therefore, we can apply the `strong coupling approximation'$^{(\citenum{Zim}%
361: )}$ to represent the wavefunction in the form
362: \begin{equation}
363: \phi _{l}(n)\simeq \varphi _{l}(n)-\varphi _{l}(-n), \label{str}
364: \end{equation}
365: where the function $\varphi _{l}(n)$ solves the equation
366: \[
367: \sum_{n^{\prime }\in \Bbb{Z}}K_{nn^{\prime }}\ \varphi _{l}(n^{\prime
368: })-\mid h\mid M\ n\ \varphi _{l}(n)=\frac{E_{l}}{2}\varphi _{l}(n).
369: \]
370: \newline
371: \newline
372: After the Fourier transform, we obtain
373: \[
374: \varphi _{l}(n)=\int_{-\pi }^{\pi }\frac{d\theta }{2\pi }\varphi _{l}(\theta
375: )\exp \left( in\theta \right) ,
376: \]
377: where
378: \begin{eqnarray}
379: \varphi _{l}(\theta ) &=&C\ \exp \left\{ -\frac{i}{2\mid h\mid M}\left[
380: f(\theta )-E_{l}\ \theta \right] \right\} , \label{fii} \\
381: C &=&(2\mid h\mid M\ \mathcal{N})^{-1/2}, \nonumber \\
382: f(\theta ) &=&2\int_{0}^{\theta }\text{d}\chi \ \omega (\chi ). \nonumber
383: \end{eqnarray}
384: The $2\pi $-periodicity condition for the function $\varphi _{l}(\theta )$
385: determines the energy levels $E_{l}$:
386:
387: \begin{equation}
388: E_{l}=\frac{f(\pi )}{\pi }-2\mid h\mid \ M\ l. \label{El}
389: \end{equation}
390: The normalization constant $C$ in (\ref{fii}) is chosen to yield
391: \[
392: \langle \phi _{l}\mid \phi _{l^{\prime }}\rangle =\frac{\delta _{ll^{\prime
393: }}}{\Delta E},
394: \]
395: where $\Delta E=2\mid h\mid M$ is the interlevel distance.
396:
397: \subsection{Decay rate}
398:
399: The first-order correction to the false vacuum energy is trivial: $%
400: E^{(1)}=\langle 0_{+}\mid V\mid 0_{+}\rangle =\mathcal{N\,}\left| h\right|
401: \,M$, the second-order correction is given by
402: \begin{equation}
403: E_{\text{ }}^{(2)}=-\Delta E\sum_{l}\frac{\mid \langle \phi _{l}\mid V\mid
404: 0_{+}\rangle \mid ^{2}}{E_{l}} \label{E2}
405: \end{equation}
406: To determine the decay rate of the false vacuum, the following trick is
407: used. We shift the excitation energy levels $E_{l}$ in (\ref{E2}) downwards
408: into the complex $E$-plane: $E_{l}\rightarrow $ $E_{l}-i\gamma $, where the
409: width $\gamma $ describes phenomenologically the decay rate of one-domain
410: states $\mid \phi _{l}\rangle $. Decay of these states should be caused by
411: the interaction term (\ref{vt}) in the same manner as the false vacuum decay
412: .
413:
414: As the result, the metastable vacuum energy gains the imaginary part
415:
416: \begin{equation}
417: \text{Im }E\simeq -\pi \ g(h)\mid \langle \phi _{l}\mid V\mid 0_{+}\rangle
418: \mid _{\text{ }E_{l}=0}^{2}, \label{ee}
419: \end{equation}
420: where
421: \begin{equation}
422: g(h)=\text{Im}\cot \left[ \frac{f(\pi )-i\pi \gamma }{2\ \mid h\mid M}%
423: \right] . \label{osci}
424: \end{equation}
425: The metastable vacuum relaxation rate $\Gamma $ is determined then in the
426: usual way (\ref{img}). It is evident from (\ref{ee}), (\ref{img}) that $%
427: \Gamma $ oscillates in $h^{-1}$ with the period $\Delta h^{-1}$ given by
428: \begin{equation}
429: \Delta h^{-1}=2\pi M/f(\pi ). \label{pe}
430: \end{equation}
431: These oscillations become considerable in the case of the resonant tunneling
432: $\gamma \lesssim \Delta E$. In the opposite limit $\gamma \gg \Delta E$
433: oscillations in $h^{-1}$ vanish and relations (\ref{ee}), (\ref{img})
434: transform to the Fermi's golden rule:$^{(\citenum{LL,RS})}$
435: \begin{equation}
436: \Gamma =2\pi \mid \langle \phi _{l}\mid V\mid 0_{+}\rangle \mid _{\text{ }%
437: E_{l}=0}^{2}. \label{GF}
438: \end{equation}
439:
440: Let us now calculate the matrix element in (\ref{ee}):
441: \begin{eqnarray}
442: \langle \phi _{l} &\mid &V\mid 0_{+}\rangle =\frac{1}{2}\int\limits_{-\pi
443: }^{\pi }\frac{d\theta }{2\pi }\ \phi _{l}^{*}(\theta )\ \langle 0_{+}\mid
444: \psi (-\theta )\,\psi (\theta )\ V\mid 0_{+}\rangle \simeq \nonumber \\
445: \int\limits_{-\pi }^{\pi }\frac{d\theta }{2\pi }\ \varphi _{l}^{*}(\theta )\
446: \langle 0_{+} &\mid &\psi (-\theta )\,\psi (\theta )\ V\mid 0_{+}\rangle .
447: \label{mel}
448: \end{eqnarray}
449: Expanding operator $V$ in the $h$-power series
450: \[
451: \langle 0_{+}\mid \psi (-\theta )\,\psi (\theta )\ V\mid 0_{+}\rangle
452: =\sum_{j=1}^{\infty }\langle 0_{+}\mid \psi (-\theta )\,\psi (\theta )\
453: \mathcal{H}^{(j)}\mid 0_{+}\rangle
454: \]
455: and keeping in it only the leading ($j=1$) term one obtains from (\ref{v}), (%
456: \ref{hami}), (\ref{h1}):
457: \begin{eqnarray*}
458: \langle 0_{+} &\mid &\psi (-\theta )\,\psi (\theta )\ V\mid 0_{+}\rangle
459: \simeq \langle 0_{+}\mid \psi (-\theta )\,\psi (\theta )\ \mathcal{H}%
460: ^{(1)}\mid 0_{+}\rangle = \\
461: \langle 0_{+} &\mid &\psi (-\theta )\,\psi (\theta )\ U\mid 0_{+}\rangle \
462: \frac{\omega (\theta )}{\sinh \omega (\theta )}\ =-2\,i\!\!\ \mathcal{N}\mid
463: h\mid M\ \frac{d\ln \epsilon (\theta )}{d\theta }\cdot \frac{\omega (\theta )%
464: }{\sinh \omega (\theta )}\ .
465: \end{eqnarray*}
466: Thus, the matrix element (\ref{mel}) can be approximately represented as
467: \begin{equation}
468: \langle \phi _{l}\mid V\mid 0_{+}\rangle \simeq -\,i\,\mathcal{N}\mid h\mid
469: M\int\limits_{-\pi }^{\pi }\frac{d\theta }{\pi }\frac{\omega (\theta )}{%
470: \sinh \omega (\theta )}\ \varphi _{l}^{*}(\theta )\ \frac{d\ln \epsilon
471: (\theta )}{d\theta }. \label{mv}
472: \end{equation}
473:
474: Substitution of (\ref{mv}), (\ref{ee}), (\ref{fii}) into (\ref{fr}) yields
475: the final expression for the imaginary part of the free energy $F_{ms}$ in
476: the limit $h\rightarrow -0$:
477: \begin{equation}
478: \func{Im}F_{ms}\simeq \frac{\pi }{2}\mid H\mid M\ g(h)\left|
479: \int\limits_{-\pi }^{\pi }\frac{d\theta }{\pi }\frac{\omega (\theta )}{\sinh
480: \omega (\theta )}\ \frac{d\ln \epsilon (\theta )}{d\theta }\exp \left[ \frac{%
481: i\ f(\theta )}{2\mid h\mid M}\right] \ \right| ^{2} \label{FIN}
482: \end{equation}
483: This expression generalizes formula (18) of reference$^{(\citenum{R})}$ to
484: arbitrary anisotropy $J_{1}/J_{2}$ and all temperatures $0<T<T_{c}$.
485:
486: The last (exponent) factor of the integrand in (\ref{FIN}) oscillates with
487: high frequency in the considered case of small $\left| h\right| $.
488: Therefore, in the limit $\left| h\right| \rightarrow 0$, the integral in the
489: right-hand side of (\ref{FIN}) is determined by the saddle point of $%
490: f(\theta )$: $\theta =\theta _{1}\equiv -i\ln z_{1},\quad \omega (\theta
491: _{1})=0,$ and asymptotically equals to
492: \begin{equation}
493: \func{Im}F_{ms}\simeq B\mid H\mid g(h)\exp \left[ -\frac{A}{\mid H\mid }%
494: \right] , \label{FIN2}
495: \end{equation}
496: where
497: \begin{eqnarray}
498: A &=&\frac{\left| \ f(\theta _{1})\right| }{M\ \beta },\quad \label{AA} \\
499: B &=&\frac{\pi \,M}{18}\ . \label{B}
500: \end{eqnarray}
501:
502: \section{Discussion}
503:
504: First, let us establish equivalence of expressions (\ref{fd}) and (\ref{AA})
505: for the amplitude $A,$ which are given by the phenomenological droplet
506: theory and by our transfer-matrix calculations.
507:
508: The droplet equilibrium shape in the $d=2$ Ising model is determined by the
509: equation
510: \begin{equation}
511: a_{1}\cosh (\beta \lambda x_{1})+a_{2}\cosh (\beta \lambda x_{2})=1,
512: \label{sh}
513: \end{equation}
514: obtained by Zia and Avron.$^{(\citenum{ZA})}$ Here $x_{1},x_{2}$ denote
515: Descartes coordinates of a point on the droplet boundary, the scale
516: parameter $\lambda $ determines the droplet size, and
517: \[
518: a_{1}=\frac{\tanh (2K_{2})}{\cosh (2K_{1})}\ ,\;\qquad a_{2}=\frac{\tanh
519: (2K_{1})}{\cosh (2K_{2})}.
520: \]
521: It is remarkable, that equation (\ref{sh}) can be rewritten in terms of the
522: Ising model excitation spectrum (\ref{eps}) first obtained by Onsager:$^{(%
523: \citenum{Onsager})}$
524: \begin{equation}
525: x_{2}=\pm \frac{1}{\beta \lambda }\ \omega (i\,\beta \lambda \,x_{1}).
526: \label{!}
527: \end{equation}
528: Integrating in $x_{1}$ this equation we find the area of the
529: equilibrium-shaped droplet $S(\lambda )=W/\lambda ^{2}$, where
530: \[
531: W=\frac{2}{\beta ^{2}}\left| \,f(\theta _{1})\right| .
532: \]
533: It follows from Wulff's theorem$^{(\citenum{ZA})}$ that the surface energy $%
534: \Sigma (\lambda )$ also can be expressed in $W$: $\Sigma (\lambda
535: )=2W/\lambda $. Therefore, $\hat{\Sigma}^{2}=4W$, and
536: \[
537: A=\frac{\beta \hat{\Sigma}^{2}}{8\ M}=\frac{\mid f(\theta _{1})\mid }{M\
538: \beta }
539: \]
540: in exact agreement with (\ref{AA}).
541:
542: Our expression $\pi \,M/18$ for the amplitude $B$ is the same as that
543: obtained previously in the extreme anisotropic limit.$^{(\citenum{R})}$ As
544: it was mentioned in the introduction, this expression is very close to the
545: Voloshin's result (\ref{Vol}). The latter is expected to be exact in the
546: critical region, where fluctuations are isotropic and universal. It is
547: likely, that the small discrepancy between (\ref{B}) and (\ref{Vol}) is
548: caused by approximations used in our modified perturbation theory. We hope
549: to clarify this question in future.
550:
551: Let us compare obtained expressions for the amplitude $B$ with the numerical
552: results by Baker and Kim$^{(\citenum{1})}$ which they calculated for the
553: symmetric case $J_{1}=J_{2}\equiv J$ of the Ising model . These authors
554: considered the power series for the magnetization $M(h)$ at a fixed
555: temperature below $T_{c}$:
556: \[
557: M(h)=M(0)-2\sum_{n=1}^{\infty }\left( -2h\right) ^{n}a_{n},
558: \]
559: and calculated numerically 12 coefficients $a_{n}$ in this expansion at $%
560: u=0.1\ u_{c}$, and 24 coefficients at $u=0.9\ u_{c}$. Here $u=\exp (-4\beta
561: J)$; $u_{c}=3-\sqrt{8}$ corresponds to the critical temperature. On the
562: other hand, Lowe and Wallace$^{(\citenum{LW})}$ demonstrated by use of the
563: dispersion relation, that equation (\ref{FF}) leads to the following
564: asymptotic formula for the coefficients $a_{n}$:
565: \begin{equation}
566: a_{n}\stackunder{n\rightarrow \infty }{\rightarrow }\frac{B}{2\pi }\left(
567: 2A\beta \right) ^{-n}\frac{(n+1)!}{n}. \label{WL}
568: \end{equation}
569: So, the ratio
570: \begin{equation}
571: R_{n\text{ }}=\frac{B\ (n+1)!}{2\pi \ n\ a_{n}\ (2A\beta )^{n}} \label{rat}
572: \end{equation}
573: should approach to unity at large $n$, if we put in it the correct values of
574: amplitudes $A$ and $B$ . We plot in Fig. 2 this ratio, where coefficients $%
575: a_{n}$ were taken from paper$^{(\citenum{1})}$ by Baker and Kim. The left
576: pair of curves corresponds to the low temperature case $u=0.1\ u_{c},$ the
577: right pair of curves corresponds to the higher temperature $u=0.9\ u_{c}$.
578: The amplitude $A$ in (\ref{rat}) is taken from (\ref{AA}). Solid and dashed
579: curves differ by choice of the amplitude $B$ in (\ref{rat}). In solid
580: curves, it is chosen as $B=\pi M/18$ according to our result (\ref{B}); in
581: dashed curves $B=M/(2\pi )$ according to Voloshin's result.$^{(%
582: \citenum{Voloshin2})}$ All four curves in Fig. 2 seems to stabilize at large
583: $n$ to the values, which are rather close to unity. This indicates a
584: remarkable good agreement of numerical results$^{(\citenum{1})}$ with
585: expressions (\ref{Vol}) or (\ref{AA}). Though, agreement with Voloshin's
586: value seems somewhat better, saturation in curves is not achieved, and
587: further numerical calculation are desirable to distinguish between (\ref{Vol}%
588: ) and (\ref{AA}).
589:
590: Expression (\ref{FIN2}) differs from (\ref{FF}) by the oscillating factor $%
591: g(h)$. We interpret this factor as the correction coursed by the
592: discrete-lattice effects. These oscillation being negligible in the critical
593: region, may be significant at low temperatures, especially in the presence
594: of strong anisotropy.$^{(\citenum{O})}$ The period of oscillations in $%
595: h^{-1} $ is given by (\ref{pe}). It is plotted in Fig. 3 in the symmetric
596: case $K_{1}=K_{2}\equiv K$. Such oscillations with period $\Delta
597: h^{-1}\approx 1/2 $ were observed in numerical constrained transfer matrix
598: calculations by G\"{u}nther \textit{et al.}$^{(\citenum{GRN})}$\textit{\ }at
599: $K=1$. This period agrees well with our value $\Delta h^{-1}=0.494891,$
600: which follows from (\ref{pe})$.$
601:
602: \section{Acknowledgments}
603:
604: I would like to thank Professor Royce Zia for helpful correspondence.
605:
606: This work is supported by the Fund of Fundamental Investigations of Republic
607: of Belarus.
608:
609: \appendix
610:
611: \section{Fermionization\label{apa}}
612:
613: In this Appendix we present fermionic representations of spin operators,
614: which are used in Section \ref{tr}. Consideration is restricted to the
615: ferromagnetic phase $T<T_{c}$ in the thermodynamic limit $\mathcal{N}%
616: \rightarrow \infty $. In this limit the Jordan-Wigner transformation can be
617: written as$^{(\citenum{JM})}$
618: \begin{equation}
619: P_{n}=\sigma _{n}^{3}\ \sigma _{n-1}^{1}\ \sigma _{n-2}^{1}\ \ldots ,\quad
620: Q_{n}=-i\,\sigma _{n}^{2}\ \sigma _{n-1}^{1}\ \sigma _{n-2}^{1}\ \ldots .
621: \label{JW}
622: \end{equation}
623: Here $P_{n}$ and $Q_{n}$ are the fermionic operators satisfying the
624: following anticommutational relations:
625: \[
626: \left\{ P_{n}\ ,P_{n^{\prime }}\right\} =2\delta _{nn^{\prime }},\qquad
627: \left\{ Q_{n}\ ,Q_{n^{\prime }}\right\} =-2\delta _{nn^{\prime }},\qquad
628: \left\{ P_{n}\ ,Q_{n^{\prime }}\right\} =0.
629: \]
630: Let us define the another set of fermionic operators $p_{n}$, $q_{n}$, which
631: are related with $P_{n}$ , $Q_{n}$ by the duality transformation:$^{(%
632: \citenum{Kog})}$
633: \begin{equation}
634: p_{n}=i\,Q_{n},\quad q_{n}=-i\,P_{n+1}. \label{du}
635: \end{equation}
636: Operators $p_{n}$, $q_{n}$ obey the same anticommutational relations as $%
637: P_{n}$ , $Q_{n},$ span an orthogonal space of free fermion field, and
638: generate the Clifford algebra$^{(\citenum{JM})}.$
639:
640: Fermionic creation and annihilation operators $\psi (\theta ),\psi ^{\dagger
641: }(\theta )$ introduced in Section \ref{tr} are related with $p_{n}$, $q_{n}$
642: by
643: \begin{eqnarray}
644: 2i\psi (\theta ) &=&e^{-i\alpha (\theta )}\ p(\theta )-\ e^{i\alpha (\theta
645: )}q(\theta ), \label{psi} \\
646: 2i\psi ^{\dagger }(-\theta ) &=&e^{-i\alpha (\theta )}p(\theta )+e^{i\alpha
647: (\theta )}q(\theta ), \nonumber \\
648: p(\theta ) &=&\sum_{n\in \Bbb{Z}}e^{-in\theta }\ p_{n},\quad q(\theta
649: )=\sum_{n\in \Bbb{Z}}e^{-in\theta }\ q_{n}, \nonumber
650: \end{eqnarray}
651: where
652: \begin{eqnarray}
653: e^{2i\alpha (\theta )} &=&-\tanh K_{2}\ \left[ \frac{(e^{i\theta
654: }-z_{1})(e^{i\theta }-z_{2}^{-1})}{(e^{i\theta }-z_{2})(e^{i\theta
655: }-z_{1}^{-1})}\right] ^{1/2}, \label{alfa} \\
656: e^{2i\alpha (0)} &=&-1, \nonumber
657: \end{eqnarray}
658: parameters $z_{1},\ z_{2}$ are defined by (\ref{zz}).
659:
660: Relations (\ref{JW}), (\ref{du}) express operators $p_{n}$, $q_{n}$ in terms
661: of Pauli matrices. The inverse transformation reads as
662: \begin{eqnarray}
663: \ \sigma _{n}^{1} &=&p_{n}\ q_{n-1},\quad \nonumber \\
664: \sigma _{n}^{2} &=&p_{n}\ \left( p_{n-1\ }q_{n-2}\right) \left( p_{n-2}\
665: q_{n-3}\right) \ldots , \label{sig2} \\
666: \sigma _{n}^{3} &=&i\,q_{n-1}\ \left( p_{n-1}\ q_{n-2}\right) \left(
667: p_{n-2}\ q_{n-3}\right) \ldots . \label{sig3}
668: \end{eqnarray}
669: Brackets in equations (\ref{sig2}), (\ref{sig3}) are shown to indicate, that
670: $\sigma _{n}^{2}$ and $\sigma _{n}^{3}$ are the products of odd number of
671: fermionic operators, i.e. $\sigma _{n}^{2}$ and $\sigma _{n}^{3}$ are the
672: odd elements of the Clifford group.
673:
674: Following Jimbo \textit{et al.}$^{(\citenum{JM})}$\textit{, }let us
675: introduce operator $\bar{\sigma}_{n}^{3},$ which represent $\sigma _{n}^{3}$
676: under the boundary condition $\sigma _{n}^{3}\rightarrow 1$ for $%
677: n\rightarrow -\infty $:
678: \[
679: \bar{\sigma}_{n}^{3}=\,\left( q_{n-1}\ p_{n-1}\right) \left(
680: q_{n-2}p_{n-2}\right) \ldots .
681: \]
682: This operator is an even element of the Clifford group. Due to the obvious
683: identity $\bar{\sigma}_{n}^{3}\bar{\sigma}_{n^{\prime }}^{3}=\sigma
684: _{n}^{3}\sigma _{n^{\prime }}^{3}$ , operators $\sigma _{n}^{3}$ and $\ \bar{%
685: \sigma}_{n}^{3}$ produce the same correlation functions, which makes
686: reasonable to identify them in the thermodynamic limit. Accordingly, we
687: shall replace $\sigma _{n}^{3}$ by$\ \bar{\sigma}_{n}^{3}$ in the operator $%
688: U $ :
689: \begin{equation}
690: U\mapsto h\sum_{n=1}^{\mathcal{N}}\,\bar{\sigma}_{n}^{3}. \label{rep}
691: \end{equation}
692:
693: Operators $\bar{\sigma}_{n}^{3}$ are characterized up to $\pm 1$ factor by
694: the following commutation relations:
695: \begin{mathletters}
696: \begin{equation}
697: \bar{\sigma}_{n}^{3}\ q_{n^{\prime }}\ \bar{\sigma}_{n}^{3}=\varkappa
698: (n-n^{\prime })\ q_{n^{\prime }},\quad \bar{\sigma}_{n}^{3}\ p_{n^{\prime
699: }}\ \bar{\sigma}_{n}^{3}=\varkappa (n-n^{\prime })\ p_{n^{\prime }},
700: \label{ort}
701: \end{equation}
702: where
703: \end{mathletters}
704: \[
705: \varkappa (n)=\left\{
706: \begin{array}{ll}
707: 1 & \text{for }n\geq 0 \\
708: -1 & \text{for }n<0
709: \end{array}
710: \right. .
711: \]
712: Thus, $\bar{\sigma}_{n}^{3}$ induces a linear orthogonal transformation of
713: the linear space of free fermions. As it was shown by Jimbo \textit{et al.}$%
714: ^{(\citenum{JM})}$\textit{\ }in Appendix 1, such an operator can be
715: expressed as the normally ordered exponent
716: \begin{equation}
717: \bar{\sigma}_{n}^{3}=\left\langle \bar{\sigma}_{n}^{3}\right\rangle :\exp
718: \left( \rho _{n}/2\right) :. \label{normal}
719: \end{equation}
720: Here operator $\rho _{n}$ is quadratic in free fermionic variables $p_{n}$
721: and $q_{n}$, $\left\langle \bar{\sigma}_{n}^{3}\right\rangle $ is the vacuum
722: expectation value of $\bar{\sigma}_{n}^{3}$, i.e. the spontaneous
723: magnetization $\left\langle \bar{\sigma}_{n}^{3}\right\rangle =M=\left[
724: 1-k^{2}\right] ^{1/8}$. The explicit expression for $\rho _{n}$ reads as
725: \begin{eqnarray}
726: \frac{\rho _{n}}{2} &=&-\sum_{j<\,n}\psi _{j}^{(+)}\ \psi _{j}^{(-)},
727: \label{rr} \\
728: \psi _{j}^{(+)} &=&-\int_{-\pi }^{\pi }\frac{d\theta }{2\pi }\ e^{ij\theta
729: }\ U_{+}(-\theta )\ p(\theta )\ , \nonumber \\
730: \psi _{j}^{(-)} &=&\int_{-\pi }^{\pi }\frac{d\theta }{2\pi }\ e^{ij\theta }\
731: U_{-}(\theta )\ q(\theta ), \nonumber
732: \end{eqnarray}
733: where the functions
734: \[
735: U_{\pm }(\theta )=\left[ \epsilon (\theta )\right] ^{\mp 1}\ \exp \left[
736: i\alpha (\theta )\right]
737: \]
738: provide the Wiener-Hopf factorization of $\exp \left[ 2i\alpha (\theta
739: )\right] $:
740: \[
741: \exp \left[ 2i\alpha (\theta )\right] =U_{+}(\theta )\ U_{-}(\theta ).
742: \]
743: Functions $U_{+}(\theta )$ and $U_{\_}(\theta )$ are analytical in $%
744: z=e^{i\theta }$ outside and inside the unit circle, respectively. Rewriting $%
745: \psi _{j}^{(+)}$ and $\psi _{j}^{(-)}$ in terms of creation and annihilation
746: operators $\psi ^{\dagger }(\theta ),\,\psi (\theta )$ by use of (\ref{psi})
747: one obtains from (\ref{rep}), (\ref{normal}), (\ref{rr}) the desired
748: fermionic representation (\ref{v}) of the $U$ operator.
749:
750: In deriving (\ref{rr}) we have chosen the free fermion basis $p(\theta ),\
751: q(\theta )$ and applied the theorem, presented by Jimbo \textit{et al. }in
752: pages 137, 138 of their article$^{(\citenum{JM})}$. In our case, the kernel
753: functions for matrices $P,$ $E$ introduced in this theorem read as (compare
754: with equations (3.15), (3.16) in the same article):
755: \begin{eqnarray*}
756: P(\theta ,\theta ^{\prime }) &=&\frac{e^{i(n-1)(\theta -\theta ^{\prime })}}{%
757: 1-e^{-i(\theta -\theta ^{\prime }-i\,0)}}, \\
758: E(\theta ,\theta ^{\prime }) &=&\left(
759: \begin{array}{cc}
760: 0 & \exp \left[ -2i\alpha (\theta )\right] \\
761: \exp \left[ 2i\alpha (\theta )\right] & 0
762: \end{array}
763: \right) 2\pi \delta (\theta -\theta ^{\prime }).
764: \end{eqnarray*}
765:
766: To illustrate convenience of representations (\ref{v}), (\ref{normal}), (\ref
767: {rr}), we shall apply them to derive a compact Fredholm determinant formula
768: for the zero-field correlation function $\left\langle \sigma _{0,0}\ \sigma
769: _{m,n}\right\rangle $ in the ferromagnetic phase. Let us first write this
770: correlation function by use of (\ref{normal}), (\ref{v}) in the form
771: \begin{eqnarray}
772: \left\langle \sigma _{0,0}\ \sigma _{m,n}\right\rangle &=&\langle 0_{+}\mid
773: \bar{\sigma}_{0}^{3}\exp (-m\mathcal{H}^{(0)})\ \bar{\sigma}_{n}^{3}\mid
774: 0_{+}\rangle = \nonumber \\
775: M^{2}\ \langle 0_{+} &\mid &:\exp \left( \rho _{0}/2\right) :\exp \left( -%
776: \mathcal{H}^{(0)}m\right) :\exp \left( \rho _{n}/2\right) :\mid 0_{+}\rangle
777: , \label{me}
778: \end{eqnarray}
779: where
780: \begin{eqnarray*}
781: \frac{\rho _{0}}{2} &\mapsto &\frac{1}{2}\iint_{-\pi }^{\pi }\frac{d\theta
782: _{1}d\theta _{2}}{\left( 2\pi \right) ^{2}}\ e^{-\frac{i}{2}(\pi +\theta
783: _{1}+\theta _{2})}\ D(\theta _{1},\theta _{2})\ \psi (\theta _{1})\psi
784: (\theta _{2}), \\
785: \frac{\rho _{n}}{2} &\mapsto &\frac{1}{2}\iint_{-\pi }^{\pi }\frac{d\theta
786: _{1}d\theta _{2}}{\left( 2\pi \right) ^{2}}\ e^{\frac{i}{2}(\pi +\theta
787: _{1}+\theta _{2})}\ e^{-in(\theta _{1}+\theta _{2})}\ D(\theta _{1},\theta
788: _{2})\ \psi ^{\dagger }(\theta _{1})\ \psi ^{\dagger }(\theta _{2}), \\
789: D(\theta _{1},\theta _{2}) &=&\frac{1}{2\sin \left[ (\theta _{1}+\theta
790: _{2})/2\right] }\left[ \frac{\epsilon (\theta _{1})}{\epsilon (\theta _{2})}-%
791: \frac{\epsilon (\theta _{2})}{\epsilon (\theta _{1})}\right] .
792: \end{eqnarray*}
793: We have dropped all creation operators $\psi ^{\dagger }$ in $\rho _{0}/2$,
794: and all annihilation operators $\psi $ in $\rho _{n}/2$, since the normally
795: ordered exponents of $\rho $ and $\rho _{0\text{ }}$act in (\ref{me}) on the
796: vacuum states. In the well-known holomorphic representation$^{(\citenum{SF})}
797: $ of fermionic operators, the matrix element (\ref{me}) takes the form of
798: the Gaussian continual integral over Grassnann variables, which integration
799: yields immediately:
800: \begin{eqnarray}
801: \left\langle \sigma _{0,0}\ \sigma _{m,n}\right\rangle &=&M^{2}\det \left(
802: 1-D_{mn}\right) = \label{det1} \\
803: &&M^{2}\exp \left( -\sum_{j=1}^{\infty }\frac{\mathrm{Sp}D_{mn}^{2j}}{2j}%
804: \right) \label{2dd}
805: \end{eqnarray}
806: Here $D_{mn}$ denotes a linear integral operator acting on the function $%
807: f(\theta )$ as follows:
808: \[
809: D_{mn}\ f=\int\limits_{-\pi }^{\pi }\frac{d\theta ^{\prime }}{2\pi }\
810: D(\theta ,\theta ^{\prime })\exp \left\{ -\frac{in(\theta +\theta ^{\prime })%
811: }{2}-\frac{m\left[ \omega (\theta )+\omega (\theta ^{\prime })\right] }{2}%
812: \right\} \ f(\theta ^{\prime }).
813: \]
814: Equation (\ref{det1}) is a compact forms of the well-known exact
815: representation of the two-point correlation function in the Ising model
816: obtained by Wu \textit{et al.}$^{(\citenum{Wu})}$ (see equations
817: (2.9)-(2.13) in the referred article). The latter representation can be
818: reduced to (\ref{2dd}) by explicit integration in the right-hand side of
819: equation (2.12) in $\phi _{1},\phi _{3},\phi _{5,}\ldots $.
820:
821: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
822: \bibitem{Is} N.S. Isakov, \textit{Commun. Math. Phys.} \textbf{95}:427
823: (1984).
824:
825: \bibitem{Ab} D.B. Abraham and P.J. Upton, \textit{Phys. Rev. Lett. }\textbf{%
826: 69}:225 (1992).
827:
828: \bibitem{AU} D.B. Abraham and P.J. Upton, \textit{Phys. Rev. Lett. }\textbf{%
829: 70}:1567 (1993).
830:
831: \bibitem{A} A.F. Andreev, \textit{Sov. Phys. JETP} \textbf{18}:1415 (1964).
832:
833: \bibitem{Fisher} M.E. Fisher, \textit{Physics} \textbf{3}:255 (1967).
834:
835: \bibitem{Ka} H. Kastrup, \textit{Phys. Rev. Lett.} \textbf{81}:2280 (1998).
836:
837: \bibitem{Langer} J.S. Langer, \textit{Ann. Phys. (N.Y.)} \textbf{41}:108
838: (1967).
839:
840: \bibitem{GNW} N. J. G\"{u}nther, D.A. Nicole and D.J. Wallace, \textit{J.
841: Phys. }\textbf{A} \textbf{13}:1755 (1980).
842:
843: \bibitem{ZW} R.K.P. Zia and D.J. Wallace, \textit{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{B 31}%
844: :1624 (1985).
845:
846: \bibitem{Voloshin1} M.B. Voloshin, I.Yu. Kobzarev, and L.B. Okun', \textit{%
847: Yad. Fiz.} \textbf{20}:1229 (1974) [\textit{Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.} \textbf{20:}%
848: 644 (1975)].
849:
850: \bibitem{Col} S. Coleman, \textit{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{D 15}:2929 (1977),
851: Erratum: \textit{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{D 16}:1248 (1977).
852:
853: \bibitem{CC} C.G. Callan and S. Coleman, \textit{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{D 16}%
854: :1762 (1977).
855:
856: \bibitem{RG} P.A. Rikvold and B.M. Gorman, in \textit{Annual Review of
857: Computational Physics I}, edited by D. Stauffer (World Scientific,
858: Singapore, 1994).
859:
860: \bibitem{LW} M.J. Lowe and D.J. Wallace,\textit{\ J. Phys. }\textbf{A}
861: \textbf{13}:L381 (1980).
862:
863: \bibitem{Ha} C.K. Harris, \textit{J. Phys.} \textbf{A} \textbf{17}:L143
864: (1984).
865:
866: \bibitem{GRN1} C.C.A G\"{u}nther, P.A. Rikvold, and M.A. Novotny, \textit{%
867: Phys. Rev. Lett. }\textbf{71}:3898 (1993).
868:
869: \bibitem{GRN} C.C.A G\"{u}nther, P.A. Rikvold, and M.A. Novotny, \textit{%
870: Physica \textbf{A} }\textbf{212}:194 (1994).
871:
872: \bibitem{Voloshin2} M.B. Voloshin, \textit{Yad. Fiz.} \textbf{42:}1017
873: (1985) [\textit{Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.} \textbf{42}:644 (1985)].
874:
875: \bibitem{Pr} V. Privman and L.S. Schulman, \textit{J. Stat. Phys. }\textbf{%
876: 29}:205 (1982).
877:
878: \bibitem{R} S.B. Rutkevich, \textit{Phys. Rev. \textbf{B} }\textbf{60}%
879: :14525 (1999).
880:
881: \bibitem{1} G.A. Baker Jr. and D. Kim, \textit{J. Phys. }\textbf{A} \textbf{%
882: 13}:L103 (1980).
883:
884: \bibitem{SML} T.D. Schultz, D.C. Mattis and E.H. Lieb, \textit{Rev. Mod.
885: Phys. }\textbf{36}:856 (1964).
886:
887: \bibitem{JM} M. Jimbo, T. Miwa, Y. M\^{o}ri and M. Sato, \textit{Physica }%
888: \textbf{D} \textbf{1}:80\textbf{\ }(1980).
889:
890: \bibitem{LL} L.D. Landau and E.M. Lifshitz, \textit{Course of Theoretical
891: Physics, }(Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1965)\textit{, }Vol. 3.
892:
893: \bibitem{RS} M. Reed and B. Symon, \textit{Methods of Mathematical Physics,
894: }(Academic, New York, 1978), Vol. 4.
895:
896: \bibitem{Zim} J.M. Ziman, \textit{Principles of the Theory of Solids }%
897: (University Press, Cambridge, 1972).
898:
899: \bibitem{ZA} R.K.P. Zia and J.E. Avron, \textit{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{B}
900: \textbf{25}:2042 (1982).
901:
902: \bibitem{Onsager} L.\ Onsager, \textit{Phys. Rev.} \textbf{65}:117 (1944).
903:
904: \bibitem{O} R. Koteck\'{y} and E. Olivieri, \textit{J. Stat. Phys.} \textbf{%
905: 70}:1121 (1993).
906:
907: \bibitem{Kog} J.B. Kogut, \textit{Rev. Mod. Phys. }\textbf{51}:659(1979).
908:
909: \bibitem{SF} A.A. Slavnov and L.D. Faddeev, \textit{Introduction to Quantum
910: theory of Guage Fields }(Nauka, Moskow, 1988).
911:
912: \bibitem{Wu} T.T. Wu, B.M. McCoy, C.A. Tracy and E. Barouch, \textit{Phys.
913: Rev.} \textbf{B} \textbf{13}:316 (1976).\pagebreak
914: \end{thebibliography}
915:
916: \begin{center}
917: {\LARGE Figure Captions}
918: \end{center}
919:
920: \begin{quote}
921: \textbf{Figure 1: }Free energy continuation paths from the positive real
922: axis $H>0$ to the cut going along the negative real axis $H<0$.
923:
924: \textbf{Figure 2: }Plot of $R_{n}$ given by (\ref{rat}) versus $n$.
925: Coefficients $a_{n}$ in (\ref{rat}) are taken from reference$^{(\citenum{1}%
926: )} $; amplitude $A$ is taken from (\ref{AA}); amplitude $B$ is taken either
927: from (\ref{B}) (solid curves), or from (\ref{Vol}) (dashed curves). Two left
928: curves correspond to $u=0.1u_{c}$, two right curves correspond to $%
929: u=0.9u_{c} $.\newline
930:
931: \textbf{Figure 3: }Oscillation period $\Delta h^{-1}$ versus $K$ in the
932: symmetric case.
933: \end{quote}
934:
935: \end{document}
936: